Parameters in the Manufacturing workspace

[Anonymous]

Is there a way to implement Parameters into the Manufacturing workspace, like in the Design workspace?

[seth.madore]

I believe global extension values are being worked on

[BenHarper-3Dtek]

For anyone reading this old thread - Horray It seems that this is now possible - with some issues though

1) It does not work if your setup is linked to a manufacturing model, must be straight off the model. I guess this means we need to do any arrangements in the design workspace not in a manufacturing model.

2) It works without showing you that it works;(.

So for example in the images attached:

Setup Image : my setup width, depth and height, are all linked from design workspace user parameters, 

Pattern Image : My Quantity and distance values is linked to design workspace user parameters

2D Contour Image: My offset from stock bottom is linked to design workspace user parameters

!!! Even though they seem to have simple values in them - they are infact linked to my parametersand the simple values do update when I change parameters so while it looks like they are not linked - in fact they are.  Just that the UI does not give any indication that there is a link behind the value.

You can see in the last image that even though stock bottom has a 1mm value, if you click on the vertical ellipse on the side of the input box and choose edit expression - you can see here its linked to a design workspace parameter I am using called "RippleCutHeightFromBottom".

So it sees there is work to do but as long as you do not need to incorporate a manufacturing model, it can be done!

Note: One thing I have noticed is there is also a seperate parameters setup inside manufacturing models. Sadly it doesnt seem to have access to the params inside the design workspace and it seems not to play well with the setup and toolpath like the above, but it does appear that AD are working on something.

Last note: this functionality seems to also work well with the new design configurations that are now rolling out. (which is epic BTW - well done AD, late but not lacking)

[BenHarper-3Dtek]

AD if you are reading, maybe an (fx) beside the value would remind us that this is a param not a simple value, and let us use the functionality without triple-checking each time if it really worked

[infoXNDBJ]

I second that. I am currently programming fully automatic template for a common part.

I have managed to do almost everything paremetrically, except tool change. Fusion360 design vs manufacturing parameters are simpy not there.

For example I have a parameter "GewKern_D", which refers to design parameter of thread hole diameter.

The idea behind this solution is automatic tool_id change based on hole diameter. The logic programmed

GewKern_D == 3.3 ? tool_number == 81 : tool_number 82

doesn't work because Fusion360 design/machining is not aware of custom user parameters. I end up with "unknown parameter" error.

Next issue is parameters itself. In old InventorCAM, everything was at one place, and parameters could be changed instantly. Fusion360, one must swap between design/manufacturing mode to change parameters. Why not "parameters/functions" icon/function also in manufacturing mode, please?

You Autodesk guys made everything more complicated than before. The point of integrated CAM is everything simple in one workplacer as industry standard SWs such as SolidWorks/SolidCAm, Hypermill do !!!

[alexKTD4R]

I've been using fusion for many years now and based on my experience here's what I suspect... I don't think Autodesk has much control over the inner workings of the fusion360 core functionality. I could be wrong, but it seems like Autodesk may be simply integrating 3rd party modules under one umbrella that they're calling "Fusion360".

I say this because if Autodesk were actually the ones who created all the code, they simply would've included "parameters" into the CAM side like they did in the CAD side. But since they didn't include it in the beginning, and haven't added it since the start of this request thread, I'm of the impression that Autodesk doesn't have the ability to add it. I suspect that they are getting the code for the CAD and CAM engines from separate vendors and Autodesk either
doesn't have the internal know-how to implement parameters on the CAM side, or they may not have the licensing authority to modify the underlying code they're getting from their vendors.

In either case, we're left with having to come up with workarounds or hold our breath indefinitely for things like this that will likely never be implemented.

[peter.taylorSBG7G]

+1 to this request, but with Inventor as well as Fusion. Many businesses are required to use inventor/inventor cam, and not having access to model/assembly parameters in the CAM environment is really crazy to me. 
Parametric models with feature patterns (chamfered holes, slots, pockets) are defined in the model with parameters. Those same features need to be be machined, with the same count and spacing. Why not allow the manufacturing/cam parameter for the pattern access the data that created the pattern in the first place? Why have to hard code numbers in the CAM space when the number is subject to change on a part, or as part of a family of parts with model states?

[wesley_barron]

Any Update on this?? It seems like there is quite the demand for it.

[to3dornottobe]

I do have access to design parameters in the manufacture environment. In fact, if i use a template with opps that use the parameters they are also transferred. 

[jckrauskopf]

Any update on this?  It's been several years since it was acknowledged that passing parameters from the Design space to the Manufacturing space and on into Manufacturing Models is a good idea.

[Christoph_360]

Hello

---

@jckrauskopf wrote:

Any update on this?  It's been several years since it was acknowledged that passing parameters from the Design space to the Manufacturing space and on into Manufacturing Models is a good idea.

---

Are you looking for something like this?

Thanks

Christoph

[to3dornottobe]

In my opinion the parameters for the setup work in manufacture as well.  What is it that's not working?

[jckrauskopf]

Thank you @Christoph_360 and @to3dornottobe. Maybe we're using the same term (i.e. "parameter") to mean different things. I'm referring to parameters I create and use in the Design Workspace (i.e. "Modify > Change Parameters") don't flow to a Manufacturing model in the Manufacturing Workspace. In fact, when you choose "Modify > Change Parameters" the whole table is empty.

[jeff.pek]

Right, they don't. How are you wanting to use those parameters in the mfg model?

  Jeff

[jckrauskopf]

In this particular example, I have a parameterized and configured design that generates 2 components.  They are an inlay and a template to cut the inlay.  In the manufacturing space, I want to make an array of the inlay based on the parameters that generated the inlay itself.  Obviously, I could do this in the design space but for my application, the array will vary each time I use it depending on the particular piece I'm applying the inlay to.  So, in my mind, the workflow is cleaner if there's one base design in the Design Space and then different arrays of it (rectangular, circular, etc) in different manufacturing models that correspond to the unique cases it's going to be used.  Hopefully, that makes sense.

[RyanWeber]

It would be very useful in any flatpack designs where you need to adjust the thickness of material to drive the model design and also need to adjust the same thickness for CAM stock.  Generally for every piece of plywood I need to remember to adjust the thickness in both environments. 

[jckrauskopf]

That's a great example.  I'd be happy if this was implemented in such a way that the manufacturing model first inherited parameters (maybe favorited parameters like in Derive) from the design space.  Then the question is should changes to a parameter in the manufacturing model be reflected back to the design space?  I sort of think that's not a good idea.  Or maybe each inherited parameter should optionally stay linked to the one in the design space.  I can see arguments both ways.

[programming2C78B]

Just model the stock in Design and drive it off the parameter then? 

[to3dornottobe]

In a derived model the parameters and their links are lost anyway? 

[SimonSSD]

Are they actually available, just not listed in the table? I think this might have been my thread originally. Can you put “_Ref” after the parameter name, as long as you have spelt it entirely correctly after remembering what you called it? Since I first was part of this thread, I have changed my workflow considerably. Manufacturing models, unless they are extremely simple, increase the loading time for the manufacturing workspace to a level where they are not practical. Also the entire design file becomes unwieldy. I now insert and derive my models or sub-assemblies into separate design files for manufacturing, when needed, and my main models are often assemblies of sub-assemblies in different files. I see at as taking the best from Fusion’s “design it all together” with the adaptability of Inventor/Solidworks parts. I like the clear parameters table in manufacturing models because if I need more than that in a manufacturing model, is not the correct tool (for me now). I haven’t thought about your particular use case, but maybe there is a better way to go about it. I do really wish they would sort manufacturing for configurations though. That’s the thing that I’m really waiting for. Good luck

[seth.madore]

---

@to3dornottobe wrote:

In a derived model the parameters and their links are lost anyway? 

---

Not if they're "Favorited" and the Derive takes place early in the timeline (this is in reference to Derive and Parameters in the Design space)